Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1996_05_08 Planning Board Minutesrimiw AMENDED MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING BOARD OF THE TOWN OF MAMARONECK MAY 8, 1996, IN THE COURT ROOM, TOWN CENTER 740 WEST BOSTON POST ROAD MAMARONECK, NEW YORK Present: Marilyn S. Reader, Chairwoman May W. Aisen Richard H. Darsky Linda S. Harrington C. Alan Mason Stephen Andrew Moser Also Present: Steven M. Silverberg, Counsel Gary B. Trachtman, Consulting Engineer Erica Rizzi, Public Stenographer Carbone & Associates, Ltd. 111 N. Central Park Avenue Hartsdale, NY 10530 Marguerite Roma, Recording Secretary CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Chairwoman Marilyn Reader at 8:15 p.m. APPROVAL OF MINUTES On a motion made by Dr. Mason, seconded by Ms. Aisen, the Minutes of April 10, 1996 were unanimously approved. Chairwoman Reader read the application as follows: PUBLIC HEARING -SITE PLAN APPLICATION -TOWN OF MAMARONECK RECREATION DEPARTMENT - 140 Hommocks Road - Block 411 Lot 1 & 16 On a motion was made and seconded, it was unanimously RESOLVED, that the Public Hearing be, and hereby is, declared open. The Public Stenographer was present for this meeting and her transcript will become a permanent part of this record. Richard Ward, president of Ward Associates, architects for the project appeared. Mr. Ward said when they met with the Board at the previous meeting, the main issues seemed to be a question of whether a particular area on site by the outdoor pools may have been a place where prior landfill was placed and would be a questionable quality. He stated the research that was done and after the test borings taken, Ward Associates does not come to that conclusion for the following reasons. He handed out information to the Board, explained the site plan drawings in a generalized sense and discussed the effects of the most recent heavy rain. Mr. Ward then referred the Board to the memo just submitted regarding landfill, and stated that Layer 1, a top average of 7 ft. depth, is a layer of material of fill that was put in as backfill when they built the school and the pool, and from the test borings that were taken contains broken concrete, glass and wood fragments which is quite common on a construction site. Layer 2, a 4 ft. to 5 ft. layer, is a layer of organic silt deposited by a prior dredging project. Layer 3, a 30 ft. depth, is Planning Board May 8, 1996 Page 2 miscellaneous sands, gravels and traces of silt,which were probably deposited ten to fifteen thousand years ago which are totally undisturbed soils that overlay bed rock. Mr. Ward said the firm referred to the plans on the ice skating rink, and they are generally consistent with the profile presented on soils. He stated the alleged area of landfill with hazardous materials is certainly not in that location. Ms. Reader asked how many borings were done. Mr. Ward said three test borings were done in the location of the pools. He stated the four borings that were taken in 1985 for the original ice rink project, the results of which he presented to the Board this evening generally supports what he presented. Dr. Mason asked about the placement of the pilings. Mr. Ward said the pilings will penetrate the sand and gravels about 42 ft. to 45 ft. from the existing bed rock. Dr. Mason asked if the firm was still installing wood pilings. Mr. Ward said yes, the firm was still installing wood pilings. Dr. Mason asked Mr. Trachtman if he had any thoughts about the wood pilings. Mr. Trachtman said wood pilings were used on the ice rink, a structural analysis has not been done, but the indications are that the materials used for the ice rink were sufficient. Ms. Reader asked if there were any other questions from the Board or the public. Mr. Ward said this past month the firm received endorsement from the Board of Architectural Review (BAR), who asked the firm to informally return with several alternatives in the rearrangement of some of the trees which they now have. Mr. Ward said the BAR did not consider it necessary to delay the presentation to the Planning Board for approval. Ms. Aisen asked what transpired regarding the concern for the use of native trees rather than what had been presented, the Honey Locust for filtered shade, and asked what substitutes had been found for that tree species. Mr. Ward said the firm did not find any alternative for the Honey Locust, and feel that it is the right choice as the trees recommended by the BAR, White Oak, Linden tree and Birch, provide dense shade. Eve Bocca, from Conservation, said she understands the reasoning behind the Honey Locust, it is acceptable and has a good survival chance. Dr. Mason said he is still concerned about the longevity of the piles. Mr. Moser has a concern, as noted at the previous meeting,about landscaping the area south of the school. It is understood Ward Associates has a limited scope, but he feels it is important to map out areas that would require additional landscaping. Mr. Ward said he agreed with Mr. Moser, but the budget presented and approved by the Board was essentially within the fence line of the project. The areas that Mr. Moser is concerned about will be graded with topsoil, seeded and blended into existing grades. This part of the project should be referred to as jNor Phase I in terms of plantings, etc., as the Town will be making improvements to the project as it progresses. ,r► 1 Planning Board May 8, 1996 Page 3 411 Ms. Reader said though she shares Mr. Moser's long-term planning concerns, she feels that in the terms of this project if there are budget restraints the money needs to be allocated for the defined scope of the project. Mr. Moser said if there is going to be Phase II, then Ward Associates should present a drawing showing same so it can be studied. Ms. Reader said the Planning Board will take that under advisement that perhaps the Board would like to see some long-term planning in terms of the plantings and aesthetics, but with respect to this particular application the Planning Board does not have the authority to delay the approval as the Board's concerns have been articulated regarding harmonious plantings of the entire area. Ms. Reader said members of the Town Board and representatives are present and are aware of the Board's concern. On a motion was made by Mr. Darsky, seconded by Dr. Mason, it was unanimously RESOLVED, that the Public Hearing be, and hereby is, declared closed. On a motion made by Mr. Darsky, seconded by Dr. Mason it was unanimously RESOLVED, that this Board finds this matter to have no substantial environmental impact and directs the filing of a Negative Declaration. Mr. Ward said it is safe to say there is methane on the lower level. Ms. Reader asked for a motion to approve the Site Plan application for the Town of Mamaroneck Recreation Department at 140 Hommocks Road, Block 411 Lot 1 and Lot 16 as submitted in the plans dated February 15, 1996 with the additional condition that during the construction process samples of soils shall be taken and monitored to determine whether there is a discharge of any soil gases, and if there are, appropriate measures must be taken to mitigate. Ms. Aisen made the above motion,which was seconded by Dr. Mason and approved,5-1. Ms. Harrington voted nay. Chairwoman Reader asked Attorney Silverberg if the next three items on the agenda could be heard together and read the applications as follows: PUBLIC HEARING -RENEWAL - SPECIAL PERMIT - Metropolis Westchester Lanes - Athletic Express - 2444 Boston Post Road - Block 503 Lot 137 PUBLIC HEARING-RENEWAL-SPECIAL PERMIT-Metropolis Westchester Lanes-CVS-2444 Boston Post Road - Block 503 Lot 137 PUBLIC HEARING -RENEWAL - SPECIAL PERMIT - Metropolis Westchester Lanes - Staples, Inc. -2444 Boston Post Road - Block 503 Lot 137 On a motion was made and seconded, it was unanimously RESOLVED, that the Public Hearing be, and hereby is, declared open. The Public Stenographer was present for this meeting and her transcript will become a permanent part of this record. Andrew Fredman, architect for the project, appeared and said he was present to request renewal of special permits which is required because the property falls in the zoning district that does not allow retail use as Planning Board May 8, 1996 Page 4 of right but allows it as a special permit which was received two years ago as part and parcel of the libr conversion of the bowling alley for the above-referenced. Ms. Reader asked for comments from the Board. Dr. Mason said he does not have any problem with any of the three applications for renewal. Ms. Reader said they have been in business for two years and said the same terms and conditions as stated previously should apply. Ms. Reader asked for comments from the public. A member of the Board asked about the health food store. Mr. Ward said the owner had trouble leasing the Natures Warehouse space previously,and will be subject to renewal at a later date. On a motion was made by Dr. Mason, seconded by Ms. Aisen, it was unanimously RESOLVED, that the Public Hearing be, and hereby is, declared closed. On a motion was made by Ms. Aisen, seconded by Dr. Mason, the following renewals for Special Permit 111 was unanimously approved subject to the conditions as set forth in the prior Special Permits: Metropolis Westchester Lanes - Athletic Express, CVS, and Staples, Inc. - 2444 Boston Post Road - Block 503 Lot 137. Chairwoman Reader read the application as follows: CONSIDERATION-RENEWAL-SPECIAL PERMIT -Mark and Bob Car Wash d/b/a High Tech Car Wash -2434 Boston Post Road North - Block 503 Lot 326.1 Ms. Reader said a request was received from Dolores Battalia, attorney representing the applicant, asking for an adjournment until the June meeting due to illness of her mother. Chairwoman Reader read the application as follows: CONSIDERATION-SUBDIVISION-Laurel Manor - 1001 Fenimore Road-Blocks 301 and 302 Lot 1 James Vanoli, consulting engineer, representing Laurel Manor Subdivision appeared along with Richard --.. Horsman, the landscape architect on the project. Mr. Vanoli then described the six lot subdivision, presently the Medwick property, and the manner in which he is going to deal with drainage. Ms.Bocca expressed concerns of her office and the Town's planning consultant,Ferandino and Associates, with respect to flooding and drainage. Ms. Bocca, on behalf of her office, initially requested an EIS. There was a lengthy discussion concerning whether or not an Environmental Impact Statement should be required at this point. After this discussion Ms. Bocca indicated a supplement to Part III may satisfy their concerns, and the possibility of requesting an EIS still exists. Mr. Trachtman indicated that he felt the issues might be dealt with by using Part III of the EAF and o requiring additional engineering information from the applicant. Mr. Vanoli said he met with the Ms. Bocca, the Town Environmental Coordinator,and will meet with the Coastal Zone Management Commission due to the critical environmental area involved and received input Planning Board May 8, 1996 Page 5 • from her. He also met with Shimon Gitlitz and Gary Trachtman on the engineering regarding the flood plain. Mr. Vanoli, on behalf of the applicant, agreed to waive any time periods with respect to determination of significance in order to give him an opportunity to submit additional engineering data on issues relating to the flood plain, wetlands and drainage. Mr. Horsman spoke briefly on the planting concept. A motion was made by Ms. Aisen, seconded by Dr. Mason and was unanimously approved, to adjourn • Consideration-Subdivision-Laurel Manor- 1001 Fenimore Road-Blocks 301 and 302 Lot 1 to the next Planning Board meeting to be held on June 12, 1996 at 8:15 p.m. Chairwoman Reader read the application as follows: CONSIDERATION -SITE PLAN APPROVAL - Frank and Ann Auricchio -5 Fifth Avenue- Block 132 Lot 609 Robert Stanziale, the architect representing Frank and Ann Auricchio appeared stating the applicants are before the Board for a site plan approval for a multi-tenanted building in a multi-tenant site. The existing one story building will house a few different tenants inside the building. Mr. Stanziale stated after various discussion with Mr. Jakubowski, the building inspector, regarding the uses taking place on the property and the proposed uses and parking it was determined that a site plan approval had not been made and should be filed. There is also a storage yard for DiGiacomo's Auto Towing Service, and accessory parking for Collins Brothers. 4 Attorney Silverberg said Mr. Stanziale should check with the Building Department to verify if a variance is needed for the above. Mr. Trachtman asked Mr. Stanziale if the Collins Brothers' lot was paved, and if not, would it be paved. Mr. Stanziale said the lot was not paved and would not be paved unless there was a requirement for it to be paved. Mr. Trachtman then asked if the DiGiacomo auto storage yard is paved. Mr. Stanziale said the DiGiacomo auto storage yard is paved, and said there will be a new curb cut for Collins Brothers parking. Mr. Trachtman said the gas pumps were removed from the site, but the storage tanks underground were • not removed. Mr. Stanziale said the storage tanks are still on the site, a test was done for leakage into the soil and the tests showed there is none. The applicant initially wanted to fill the tanks. Mr. Trachtman said depending on the size of the tanks, 1,100 gallons, they would have to be removed or if smaller, they could be filled and left in place. On a motion made by Ms. Reader, seconded by Dr. Mason it was unanimously RESOLVED, that the Planning Board is the Lead Agency and solely responsible for determining whether the proposed action may have a significant impact on the environment; and it is FURTHER RESOLVED, that the aforementioned proposal is an Unlisted action. Planning Board May 8, 1996 Page 6 On a motion made by Ms. Reader, seconded by Dr. Mason it was unanimously agreed that the matter be 411w referred to the CZMC and BAR. Ms. Readers said the matter will be scheduled for a Public Hearing on June 12, 1996 at 8:15 p.m. Chairwoman Reader read the application as follows: CONSIDERATION -SPECIAL USE PERMIT -SAVATREE-633-635 Fifth Avenue-Block 132 Lot 175 and 643 Don Becker, Vice President of SavATree, appeared and stated in February the Board authorized a Special Use Permit for SavATree on the site. SavATree would like to replace the existing Special Use Permit by eliminating the restriction against storing pesticides, herbicides and other chemicals on site. One of the services SavATree performs for their clients, both in this town and surrounding towns, is to perform plant health care services which requires SavATree to use certain chemical products on a fairly regular basis. In order to facilitate their business, they are requesting to use an existing garage on site, modify it to meet all the current DEC recommendations for storage of pesticides and fully comply with any local regulations. • Dr. Mason asked if Mr. Becker was prepared to present the Board with specifications on the equipment SavATree will be using to store the pesticides. Mr. Becker said the State of New York, Department of Environmental Conservation has recommendations and not requirements for storage of pesticides. There is an existing garage on site, a concrete block building built on a 4 in. concrete slab. It is the intention of SavATree to create an 8 in. concrete block berme, epoxy the floor so that there is no possibility of penetration of any substances, install two(2)vents and have a containment system that is twice the volume of any products SavATree might store on site. It is not long-term storage, they will be products used on an every day basis. Different products are used 11100 at different times of the year. Ms. Aisen asked what is done with the remainder of the products not used. Mr. Becker said SavATree will minimize the inventory carried over to the following year and what is left will be stored at the Bedford Hills, the central location where the chemicals are stored in a heated space over the winter to be utilized the next season. Ms. Aisen asked if anything happens to the chemicals as they stand and age, and do they become volatile. Mr. Becker said most of the chemicals come in protected containers. Mr. Darsky asked if the facility is air conditioned. Mr. Becker said the facility is not air conditioned, but ventilation will prevent the interior of the building from going above 95 degrees. Mr. Moser asked if there was mechanical ventilation of the space. Mr. Becker said there is no mechanical ventilation of the space. Dr. Mason said presumably the material is mixed with water, and asked where the mixing takes place. Mr. Becker said the mixing takes place on the customers' property. Dr. Mason asked if there is an area that is bermed or in any way protected where trucks are worked on, loaded, unloaded and if there is any spillage is it contained. Planning Board May 8, 1996 Page 7 Mr. Becker said loading will occur on the concrete slab. By law SavATree is not allowed to have any spillage. Any spill is considered illegal under DEC rules and regulations. Each truck and facility is equipped with a kit that has a variety of different materials, i.e. adsorbents, pads, pillows and things utilized to absorb the spillage. Mr. Darsky asked where the trucks will be washed. Mr. Becker said the trucks will be washed on site. Ms. Reader said the Board had been told the trucks would not be washed on site, as it was a concern of the Board that the location is an area that flows into an environmental and sensitive area. Dr. Mason said any spillage eventually finds its way into a CEA, which is an issue that was raised previously. The assurance then was that there would be no washing on site. Mr. Becker said by law the truck is a non-target piece of equipment. SavATree treats trees and shrubs. In the Minutes of February, 1996 in answer to a question asked by Mr. Trachtman if there would be washing down of equipment at the site, Mr. Leonard, then representing SavATree, said normal truck washing as far as the exterior of the truck would occur. Mr. Becker said as there is no change in that, as SavATree prides itself with presentation. The trucks are enclosed, with everything enclosed inside the truck that is used. Mr. Trachtman asked if the trucks will be stored in the garage when not in use. Mr. Becker said the trucks will be on site. Mr. Trachtman said the trucks are used during the day, trees are sprayed, chemicals collect on the outside of the truck, it rains and said isn't that the same as washing it down? Mr. Trachtman asked how Mr. Becker deals with this in Bedford. Mr. Becker said if the Board reviews the list of materials provided, most of the products used have residuals that during the course of the day whatever ends up on the truck will be broken down via ultraviolet radiation and heat because it is existing on a nonfavorable surface and will not bond. Mr. Trachtman said if the arrangement is acceptable to the DEC in Bedford, because the potential in Bedford is SavATree can contaminate someone's ground water supply, does the Board need to be concerned about that? Mr. Becker said when SavATree applied to the Board in Bedford in 1987, the Board was very cautious about approval. Valerie O'Keeffe, Town Board Liaison, asked how far the site is from the in-flow of the culvert? Dr. Mason said the whole area drains through the culvert because it is a low area, probably 100 yards. Mr. Trachtman asked if the area surrounding the garage is a paved area. Mr. Becker said there is paving in front. Mr. Trachtman said as there is existing asphalt paving in front of the garage, and the trucks will be parked on the asphalt paving. Whatever is on the outside of the truck and is parked on the paved area will wash into the drain. Whatever is parked on the unpaved area, it will go into the ground water and asked Mr. Becker if that was significant. Mr. Becker said it is not a significant problem in Bedford, and cannot see it being a significant problem at the proposed site. Planning Board May 8, 1996 Page 8 Ms. Reader said if the DEC and the State finds it sufficient in Bedford and there is no specific regulation, should the Board be concerned? Dr. Mason said the Board has been dealing with a quite a few pesticide storage facilities, i.e. the golf course, and there are some fairly stringent guidelines. Mr. Becker then commented on the chemicals a golf course uses versus what SavATree uses. The golf courses uses huge inputs of high nitrogen fertilizers, insect control and fungal controls. The products used in lawn applications are very much different, much stronger, with longer residuals, and then described in detail some of the items listed on page 2 on the plans before the Board and the storage of same. Mr. Darsky asked if something were to fall off the shelf,would that cause corrosion of the other materials? Mr. Becker said absolutely not, because all products are packaged in plastic or metal, tubes are cardboard and all the other containers are plastic containers. None of the products are corrosive. On a motion made by Dr. Mason, seconded by Mr. Darsky, it was unanimously RESOLVED, that the Planning Board is the Lead Agency and solely responsible for determining whether the proposed action may have a significant impact on the environment; and it is FURTHER RESOLVED, that the aforementioned proposal is an Unlisted action. On a motion made by Ms. Reader, seconded by Dr. Mason it was unanimously agreed that the matter be referred to the CZMC. On a motion made by Ms. Reader, seconded by Dr. Mason it was unanimously agreed that the matter will be scheduled for a Public Hearing on June 12, 1996 at 8:15 p.m. Ms. Reader informed Mr. Becker that it was his responsibility to mail the notice of the meeting to the neighbors. Ms. Roma, secretary to the Planning Board, told Mr. Becker she will contact him when the notice is prepared and should be mailed ten (10) days before the meeting to the neighbors, presenting an affidavit of service to the secretary for the file. NEXT MEETING The next meeting of this Board will be held on June 12, 1996. ADJOURNMENT On a motion made and seconded the meeting was unanimously adjourned midnight. / / Iei/1 Marguerite R , Recording Secretary